How To write A Literature Review

The literature review is a double-headed creature, as there are typically (though not always) two kinds of literature reviews we write, read, or use as resources most often. The first type of literature review is the more informal type, which probably has a wider readership: it is the review of a written piece of work, a summary and an evaluation of, for example, a recently published book. The second kind of literature review is the scholarly resource, written as a review of a book or textbook, yes, but usually including all the salient points of the resource in a thorough but synthesized format.

The casual, for-the-public in general literature review includes emotional or visceral, aesthetic or intellectual responses and discussions of credibility, creative worth, and literary value. The more academic literature review contains, primarily, a more intellectually based and focused evaluation or analysis and a summation of research done and detailed in the original research report. For example, a literature review for the masses, a.k.a. a literary review or book review, might look like this (excerpted):

“…when someone says, “You gotta read The Celestial Jukebox,” read it for sure. Or, wait for the movie…which should surely follow. For The Celestial Jukebox is Fried Green Tomatoes, Magnolia, and even a touch of Gone with the Wind in the making.”

Likewise, a scholarly literature review might look like this (excerpted):

“…Some studies, however, have taken a different approach by looking not so much at power in mixed-sex interactions as at how same-sex groups produce certain types of interaction. In a typical study of this type, Maltz and Borker (1982) developed lists of what they described as men's and women's features of language….” [from Allastair Pennycook’s example of a literature review]

When writing a literature review of the first type, then, one would include the following:

When writing a literature review of the second type, then, one would include the following (as explained by professors at University of California, Santa Cruz): 1) a subject/topic/theory overview; 2) objectives of the literature review; 3) a categorizing of the works under review; 4) a comparing and contrasting of the inner workings of each source being reviewed; and concluding commentary which points to the source with the more valuable, more valid, better-supported, more convincing arguments or positions.

The alternative literature review, or the book review or report, includes 1) a summary (whether the book being reviewed is fiction or non-fiction); 2) examples of ideas or characters, plots, setting, and/or other elements; and 3) your opinion of the work, what was most interesting, what worked and/or didn’t work, and whether or not you think this book is a must-read for others (including, briefly, why you think what you do).